My guess would be inconsistent cheapo volt meter or power
supply/battery voltage was fluctuating.
On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 10:24 PM, Greg Ihnen os10ru...@gmail.com wrote:
That's what I thought... but... he said: We see 27.3 volts at the battery.
And 27.1 volts at the top with no load
On Thu,
Hello Members,
I have a shopping list started for WISPPALOOZA, I will be interviewing
companies to buy a new billing system (mine is 18 years old), I am
interested in expanding into surveillance monitoring and in-home
management systems for our installers to add to our services. Also I
want
At 10/19/2012 12:40 AM, Dennis Burgess wrote:
Maybe I should take this off-list but this would be a better
question. What RFC or industry standard features are you referring
? Specific items! :)
It's not in RFCs; RFCs are the IETF vehicle, which is really all
about TCP/IP. Carrier
Mike,
I completely agree and I think it is a goal the WISP industry needs to
work towards - the provisioning of CPE is still a nightmare in
comparison to DOCSIS. PPPoE is not a good solution, IMO - it's arguably
better than nothing but you shouldn't have to rely on the customer
supplied
It does build a security, though. Security = 1/convenience*0.72
Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 1:55 PM, Simon Westlake si...@powercode.com wrote:
Mike,
I completely agree and I think it is a goal the
What builds security?
On 10/19/2012 1:00 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:
It does build a security, though. Security = 1/convenience*0.72
Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 1:55 PM, Simon Westlake si...@powercode.com
The opposite of convenience and standardization. You do things your way, I
do things my way, another guy does things his way - makes it hard to jump
from network to network from a white hat or black hat perspective.
Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
On Fri, 2012-10-19 at 12:55 -0500, Simon Westlake wrote:
I completely agree and I think it is a goal the WISP industry needs to
work towards - the provisioning of CPE is still a nightmare in
comparison to DOCSIS. PPPoE is not a good solution, IMO - it's arguably
better than nothing but you
This is true. If there were only some software company that would come
up with a way to make this easier and add some level of security into
the mix :-)
Perhaps I have said too much
;)
--
Simon Westlake
Powercode.com
(920) 351-1010
___
don't know why you would let the customer equipment auth. our network all
auth is done at the CPE that we control.
On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 12:55 PM, Simon Westlake si...@powercode.comwrote:
Mike,
I completely agree and I think it is a goal the WISP industry needs to
work towards - the
I pretty much say 'meh' to that. What it really means is that a smart
person can probably quickly find a way to exploit your network because
everyone is reinventing the wheel and making a lot of mistakes doing it.
I get what you're saying but I don't agree that it is a good reason for
lack of
On 10/19/2012 1:48 PM, LTI - Dennis Burgess wrote:
don't know why you would let the customer equipment auth. our network
all auth is done at the CPE that we control.
A lot of people are enabling public IPs at the premise by having the
customer router engage in PPPoE with the ISP concentrator.
I have all of that now. I NAT the CPE.
Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 2:49 PM, Simon Westlake si...@powercode.com wrote:
I pretty much say 'meh' to that. What it really means is that a smart
person can
Yeah.. that's the solution most WISPs are forced into. Would sure be
nice to do it without NAT.
On 10/19/2012 1:58 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:
I have all of that now. I NAT the CPE.
Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Fri, Oct 19,
What we're (well, I am anyway) saying is that the way the WISP industry does
it... is sub-optimal. The customer should be able to supply whatever device
they want, be handed up to a configured maximum number of public IP addresses
(specified per account), but the CPE has managed all account
Except that's sub-optimal. I do it that way, but it's not the best way of doing
it. We shouldn't have to manage that.
-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com
- Original Message -
From: Josh Luthman j...@imaginenetworksllc.com
To: WISPA General List
It's going to require the radio company to do it first.
-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com
- Original Message -
From: Butch Evans but...@butchevans.com
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Friday, October 19, 2012 1:16:07 PM
Subject: Re:
On Fri, 2012-10-19 at 15:52 -0500, Mike Hammett wrote:
Except that's sub-optimal. I do it that way, but it's not the best way of
doing it. We shouldn't have to manage that.
What is it that you feel you have to manage behind the natted CPE?
Unless they are a business account, they don't really
On Fri, 2012-10-19 at 15:52 -0500, Mike Hammett wrote:
It's going to require the radio company to do it first.
So, you want to see a mechanism in place where you (or your customer)
purchase some random gear, put it on their tower or house and they are
online without you doing anything? THAT is
I guess not. ;-)
Either they have to configure PPPoE or I have to configure NAT. If they use
PPPoE, they don't pass 1500 byte packets (I've asked about raising the MTUs
above 1500 to accommodate, and no one had an answer) and they have to configure
the router. You use DHCP and now either you
A friend of mine suggested that I put a simple DIY LM317 voltage regulator
on the line. Just built one and it works to reduce the voltage just enough
for you to come in under the limit if you have a 24v solar power supply
system
http://diyaudioprojects.com/Technical/Voltage-Regulator/
- - -
No.
The cable modem (radio) does the authentication (therefore rate limiting, one
address per house, etc.) while the customer supplied device is the terminus for
the public IP and does the NAT. I install the radio, hand them the cat6 out of
the back of the PoE and they plug it into whatever
No, I think he wants some piece of equipment that allows the subscriber
to plug into the ethernet port on his CPE and it is handed a public IP
address via DHCP (that he can control without knowing the MAC of the
equipment).
One way to come close would be to assign a /30 to each customer and
Either they have to configure PPPoE or I have to configure NAT. If they use
PPPoE, they don't pass 1500 byte packets (I've asked about raising the MTUs
above 1500 to accommodate, and no one had an answer) and they have to
configure the router. You use DHCP and now either you can't do the
i will respectfully disagree..WISP Industry is rather a broad
Term... How one provider (WISP or otherwise) sets up their Service
DMARC / Delivery of the Service is totally dependent on the WISP and to
Whom they are delivering the Service to.
If you are saying what you are saying in the
Wish we could unsubscribe from certain, never ending threads.
On Oct 19, 2012 5:52 PM, Faisal Imtiaz fai...@snappydsl.net wrote:
i will respectfully disagree..WISP Industry is rather a broad
Term... How one provider (WISP or otherwise) sets up their Service
DMARC / Delivery of the Service
Sorry bro. hit the delete key.
Faisal Imtiaz
Snappy Internet Telecom
7266 SW 48 Street
Miami, Fl 33155
Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232
Helpdesk: 305 663 5518 option 2 Email: supp...@snappydsl.net
On 10/19/2012 6:54 PM, Zach Mann wrote:
Wish we could unsubscribe from certain, never ending
On Fri, 2012-10-19 at 16:49 -0500, Mike Hammett wrote:
No.
The cable modem (radio) does the authentication (therefore rate limiting, one
address per house, etc.) while the customer supplied device is the terminus
for the public IP and does the NAT. I install the radio, hand them the cat6
On Fri, 2012-10-19 at 15:50 -0500, Mike Hammett wrote:
What we're (well, I am anyway) saying is that the way
the WISP industry does it... is sub-optimal.
The way YOU are doing it may be sub-optimal. It is not an industry wide
problem. There are ways to accomplish what you want.
The
wire and connection loss.
On 10/18/2012 2:03 PM, Greg Ihnen
wrote:
A voltage difference with no load? What's causing the
drop?
On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 10:06 AM, Justin
Wilson li...@mtin.net
wrote:
We
I've been in electronics for 30+years.
Trust me, there always small variations in voltage on long cable
runs, even under no load.
--
On 10/18/2012 10:24 PM, Greg Ihnen
wrote:
That's what I thought... but... he said: "We
see 27.3
Watch the heat dissipation on that...
--
On 10/19/2012 5:55 PM, Olufemi Adalemo
wrote:
A friend of mine suggested that I put a simple DIY
LM317 voltage regulator on the line. Just built one and it works
to reduce the voltage just enough for
32 matches
Mail list logo
